Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Samsung Supposedly Wins Orders to Produce Apple Watch Components
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
"Controls" vs. "Does"
----------
It's tempting, but I still want my watch.
No need. Samsung already have a similar looking smart watch on the market.
Yes, but the Apple Watch will knock it for 6. Then one year later, the new Samsung watch will suddenly develop all the capabilities of the Apple Watch.
And what exactly will the Apple Watch do that the Samsung Gear doesn't do already?
I'm sorry? I was simply completing a quote.
----------
Sell much more units
Okay, now i question everything...
What sense does it make when your competitor makes your components?
Some may call it "conflict of interest".
What sense does it make when your competitor makes your components?
Some may call it "conflict of interest".
This is pretty silly. AFAIK when the
watch debuts, it will lack a functionality already present in smartwatches on the market. I'm not sure what capabilities you think the watch will have. Outside of it's deep integration in the iOS ecosystem, there's nothing new being brought to the table. If report's are true, it actually brings less than other watches since the heavy lifting (at introduction) will be done on the iPhone.On topic: In my opinion no one should be surprised that Samsung will manufacture components for Apple. No one should really care either. As long as they provide the volume, quality, and cost consumers benefit... and so does Apple. It's simple business. When/if Samsung's competitors can reliably displace them, then Apple can remove them from their supply chain. Until then, why not use them?
----------
Why question anything? When has Samsung not made Apple components?
I'm waiting for Appleinsider nuts to try to open their watches to see if they got a "Samedung" watch and then to demand a return ...
Oh God, I'm just trying to wake up in the morning and now here is another boring, sleep-inducing Samsung article bound to bring out the typical anti-Samsung losers. Yawn.
I thing I'll jump over to the Mac Pro Forum where actual computer users discuss computer use.
I thing I'll jump over to the Mac Pro Forum where actual computer users discuss computer use.
So they can copy what?
A design and showcasing of software that everyone has already seen? What exactly can they copy by creating some of the components. Are they getting all the software code too?
Also, as been stated, they already have several smart watches in the market already and continue to develop new ones.
If you know apple's history, you know that Apple actually did manufacture their own hardware for many years at the start of the companys history. If you look at what Apple is doing with the Mac Pro, they have started doing things in the US. So to say that they never had the ambition is to completely ignore the past and present of the company.
My guess is that no one else is able to do this right now, but apple is no fool. They continue to look for other companies to step up AND they are looking for opportunities to bring things in-house. However, it seems that Apple is taking its time and who knows where they end up in a few years. Certainly, the experience with GT did not help, but I would not be surprised at all, if they do bring in some additional components in-house over the years. Especially as they continue to dabble in robotics (as in the plant for the Mac Pro).
This is why I'll keep up with the Apple Watch for now and the actually buy one in its 4th generation. That way Apple has more time to figure out what they are trying to do. I imagine it'll become much more thinner and functional in 4 years. It took Apple years to finally get the iPad right with the iPad Air 2.
Offer a better user experience?
It's like asking why anyone would want an iPad when there were already windows-based tablet PCs that sported full-blown desktop OSes, ran desktop applications, supported multitasking and had full stylus support.
Or why anyone would want an iPhone that lacked a physical keyboard or a removable battery?
In both scenarios, if you just list out the specs on paper, both iOS devices will end up looking quite pathetic in comparison. But in practice, what they arguably lacked in capability, they more than made up for with a UI that was an absolute dream to use. So good that users were perfectly happy to overlook their limitations.
Anyone can dump a hundred different features in a device. As history as shown, if they suck, people simply won't use them.